See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/267850336

COARSE AND FINE PARTICLE FLOTATION

Article

CITATIONS READS

8 994

4 authors, including:

Maohong Fan
Univ. Wyoming and Georgia Tech
341 PUBLICATIONS 7,232 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Mercury Removal View project

Chemical-Looping Based CH4 Reforming View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Maohong Fan on 23 December 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. All in-text references underlined in blue are added to the original document
and are linked to publications on ResearchGate, letting you access and read them immediately.
 COARSE AND FINE PARTICLE FLOTATION

H.E. Wyslouzil1, J. Kohmeunch2, L. Christodoulou3, M. Fan3

1
Canadian Process Technologies Inc.
Unit 1 - 7168 Honeyman Street
Delta, BC Canada, V4G 1G1
2
Eriez Manufacturing
2200 Asbury Road
Erie, USA, PA 16505
3
Canadian Process Technologies Inc.
2200 Asbury Road
Erie, USA, PA 16505

ABSTRACT

Eriez HydroFloat separators and Canadian Process Technologies (CPT) flotation columns
have been developed to overcome the limitations of traditional flotation cells in recovering coarse and
fine particles, respectively. The flotation column can effectively separate 30-5 μm phosphate. Several
industrial-scale HydroFloat separators have been installed in phosphate and potash beneficiation plants.
Industrial-scale ultra-coarse (+850 μm) phosphate separation results suggest that a more than 40% BPL
recovery increase and a 37% collector consumption reduction can be achieved. The article describes
the applications of Eriez HydroFloat separators to coarse particle separation and the CPT flotation
columns to fine/ultrafine particle flotation.
 INTRODUCTION

Mineral particle size is an important parameter in froth flotation. In 1931, Gaudin, et al. [1]
showed that coarse and extremely fine particles are more difficult to recover by froth flotation as
compared to intermediate size particles. This was approved by Morris [2] in 1952. Generally, the
flotation recovery and efficiency deteriorate rapidly when operating in the extremely fine (<10 μm) or
coarse particle size ranges (>250 μm). For minerals such as phosphate, the existing conventional
flotation practices are optimal only for the recovery of particles in the size range of about 45 to 250 μm.
The improved flotation performance of coarse and fine particles has long been a goal in the minerals
processing industry. A lot of efforts have been made to overcome the inefficiencies associated with
processes and equipment.

To overcome the limitations of traditional flotation cells in recovering coarse particles, a new
separation device, the Eriez HydroFloat separator has been developed. The HydroFloat cell separates
particles based on the apparent density differences between hydrophilic particles and particle-bubble
aggregates after the selective attachment of air bubbles to the hydrophobic component of the feed
stream. The HydroFloat separator is different from teeter-bed separators that are commonly used in
minerals industry. In teeter-bed separation, the hindered-settling velocity of particles can be described
by the equation advocated by Kohmuench et al. [3]:

(1)

where g is the acceleration due to gravity, d is the particle size, ρs is the density of the solid particles, ρf
is the density of the fluidized suspension, η is the apparent viscosity of the fluid, Re is Reynolds
number, φ is the volumetric concentration of solids, φmax is the maximum volumetric packing, and β is
a constant and dependent on Reynolds number Re. This equation indicates that the settling velocity of a
particle in a hindered-settling environment is primarily a function of both particle size and density. It
can be seen from Equation (1) that a teeter-bed separator can be efficiently utilized as a gravity
separator only when the feed particle size range is relatively narrow and the density difference between
the mineral and gangue is sufficient. However, teeter-bed separators often suffer from the
misplacement of low-density coarse particles to the high-density underflow, especially when the
particle size range is relatively wide. Some coarse low-density particles accumulate at the top of the
bed due to being too light to penetrate the teeter bed and too heavy to be carried by the rising water into
the overflow launder. Therefore they are eventually forced by mass action downward to the discharge
as more particles accumulate at the top of the teeter bed. The effort to elutriate the low-density solids to
the overflow by increasing the teeter-water velocity will cause fine, high-density solids to be misplaced
to the overflow launder.

HydroFloat separators overcome the shortcomings of traditional teeter-bed separators and

flotation cells by combining their advantages. Figure 1 schematically shows the full-scale HydroFloat
separator, which consists of an upper separation chamber and a lower dewatering cone. The particles to
be separated may be naturally hydrophobic or made hydrophobic through the addition of flotation
collectors. Pulp feed enters near the top of the separation chamber. The HydroFloat separator operates
like a traditional hindered-bed separator with the feed settling against an upward current of fluidization
(teeter) water. The teeter water is supplied through a network of pipes that extend across the bottom of
the entire cross-sectional area of the separation chamber. In addition to the teeter water, the HydroFloat
separator is continuously aerated by injecting compressed air and a small amount of frothing agent into
the fluidization water. The rising air bubbles will attach to the hydrophobic particles and reduce their
effective density. The lighter bubble-particle aggregates rise to the top of the denser teeter bed and
overflow the top of the separation chamber. Unlike flotation, the bubble-particle agglomerates do not
need to have sufficient buoyancy to rise to the top of the cell because the teetering effect of the
hindered bed forces the low-density agglomerates to overflow into the product launder [4]. Hydrophilic
particles that do not attach to the air bubbles settle down in the teeter bed and are eventually discharged
at the bottom of dewatering cone.
 Figure 1 - Schematic illustration of a full-scale HydroFloat separator

For fine particle flotation, column flotation cells were introduced to the market place as
devices capable of producing concentrates that were lower in impurities than those produced by other
types of flotation machines. The ability to operate columns with deep froth beds and to wash the froth
was the main reasons cited for the improved metallurgical performance. In recent years, many
phosphate producers have installed column flotation systems as a means of boosting production whilst
reducing operating costs. The size range of recoverable apatite particles has been extended from about
30 μm down to 5 μm through the introduction of column flotation [5]. The high degree of selectivity
achieved by this equipment has made it economical to treat material previously considered to be
tailings.

The depletion of high grade reserves coupled with increasing market pressure for improved
product quality has forced iron ore producers to re-examine their process flowsheets and evaluate
alternate or supplemental processing routes. The requirement for higher quality pellets demands that
the silica content be lowered to levels ranging from 2.0% SiO2 to below 1.0% SiO2. Reverse flotation
(silica is floated away from the iron concentrate) has proven to be an economical and effective method
for reducing the concentrate silica content to very low levels. Laboratory and commercial test-work has
demonstrated some significant metallurgical and economic advantages when column flotation cells are
used for this application. Excellent metallurgical performance [6-8] along with low capital and
operating costs [9] has made column flotation popular in the mineral processing industry. For iron ore
applications, the ability to wash the froth has provided a means of obtaining low concentrate silica
levels while keeping iron losses to a minimum. Recent cost comparisons [10] have shown that the cost
of installing a column flotation circuit is typically 20% - 30 % less than an equivalent conventional
flotation circuit but can be as much as 50% lower depending on the circuit and plant location. The
Brazilian iron ore industry has led the world in adopting column flotation technology for reducing the
silica content of iron pellets [11]. CPT, a wholly owned subsidiary of Eriez Manufacturing, has been
instrumental on supplying flotation columns to this industry. Several companies have installed, or are
in the process of installing column cells into their process flowsheets. Samarco Mineracao S.A., the
first Brazilian producer to use column cells, installed columns to increase flotation capacity as part of a
plant expansion program [12] in 1990. Since that time, they have installed additional columns for the
recovery of fine iron from the desliming circuit and for a recent plant expansion program. The
application of column flotation for silica rejection is being actively investigated by several iron ore
companies in Brazil, Canada, the United States, Venezuela, and India.

COARSE PARTICLE HYDROFLOAT CELL FLOTATION

 Eriez Manufacturing has conducted extensive HydroFloat testing in applications including
coarse phosphate [13], potash, diamonds and coal [14]. One of most elaborate and complete test
programs was conducted at the Mosaic Company’s South Fort Meade Mine. This test program
encompassed laboratory, pilot and full scale testing to evaluate the Eriez HydroFloat separator
performance.

Pilot-Scale and Full-Scale Testing

During early pilot-scale testing, feed to the test unit was continuously classified, conditioned,
and upgraded in a HydroFloat separator. In the HydroFloat phosphate separation process, the classified
feed is suspended in a fluidized-bed and then aerated. The reagentized phosphate particles encounter
and attach to the rising air bubbles. The phosphate particle-bubble aggregates report to the product
launder while hydrophilic gangue particles are discharged from the bottom of the separator as a high
solids content (65-70%) tailing. The test results indicate that the HydroFloat separator can produce a
high-grade phosphate product in a single stage of separation. Product quality ranged between 70-72%
BPL and 5-10% insols. BPL recoveries exceeded 98% [4].

The fluidized bed acts as a “resistant” layer through which no bubble/particle aggregates can
penetrate. In addition, the high solids content of the teeter bed promotes bubble-particle attachment and
reduces the cell volume required to achieve a given capacity. Subsequent pilot-scale tests showed
similar results for both coarse and ultra-coarse material. Preliminary estimates indicated that the
surfactant (i.e., frother) usage would be decreased by 22% and 40% for the coarse and ultra-coarse
circuits, respectively. Furthermore, it was also predicted that the addition rate of the fatty acid and fuel
oil blend would be decreased by nearly 40% for both circuits [13]. Based on the pilot-scale test results,
several HydroFloat units as shown in Figure 2 were installed at South Fort Meade as retrofits [13].

Figure 2 - Full-scale HydroFloat separators

Figure 3 shows the results obtained from a full-scale HydroFloat separator retrofit. In a single
stage, the HydroFloat separator provided BPL recoveries approaching and exceeding 90% while the
existing cells struggled to achieve 80% BPL recovery. It can be clearly seen from the figure that the
performance of single HydroFloat separator is close to the performance of the combined rougher-
scavenger pneumatic cells [13]. The single HydroFloat rougher cell provided metallurgical results
superior to the pneumatic rougher flotation cell installed on a parallel coarse feed stream. The
HydroFloat separator retrofits are able to treat 56% more material than the previously installed
pneumatic cells. A feed rate of 20 t/h/m2 was obtainable for HydroFloat separator. A BPL recovery
increase more than 40% and a 37% collector consumption reduction can be achieved by the application
of this new technology to industrial-scale ultra-coarse (+0.85 mm) phosphate separation [13].
 Figure 3 - Test results of full-scale HydroFloat cell and pneumatic cell
T

Advantages of the HydroFloat Separator

The HydroFloat separator is both a flotation device and a density separator, which combines
the advantages of both froth flotation and gravity separation. For treating coarse particles, the
advantages of the HydroFloat cells over traditional flotation processes includes enhanced separation
recovery, higher throughput capacity, reduced reagents and air consumption etc.

(1) Increased coarse particle flotation recovery or the maximum particle size limit: Two key
steps in coarse particle flotation are bubble-particle attachment and detachment. The hindered
settling/rise conditions within the teeter bed of the HydroFloat cell significantly reduced the bubble
rising velocity and particle settling velocity. The reduced velocities will increase the particle’s sliding
time on the bubble surface after the bubble-particle collision, improve the probability of bubble-particle
attachment, and thus enhance the flotation recovery. The use of fluidization water in the HydroFloat
cell can keep particles dispersed in suspension without the intense agitation required by mechanical
flotation machines. Consequently, the reduced cell turbulence will decrease the centrifugal force that
pulls the particle away from the attached bubble surface, decrease the probability of bubble-particle
detachment, and so promote the flotation recovery or the maximum particle size limit.

(2) Higher throughput capacity: The presence of the high-solids teeter bed reduces the
turbulence commonly associated in traditional flotation units and therefore enhances the buoyancy of
the particles. The teetering effect of the hindered-bed relinquishes the need for bubble-particle
aggregates to have sufficient buoyancy to rise to the top of the cell. The low density agglomerates can
easily overflow into the product launder. Consequently, the teetering increases the separation capacity.

(3) Reduced reagents and air consumption: The teeter bed in the HydroFloat cell can act as an
air distributor, which may decrease the probability of air bubble coalescence and reduce the frother
consumption. The separation of the HydroFloat Cell is based on the density differences between
hydrophilic particles and hydrophobic particle-bubble aggregates. The density of the bubble-particle
aggregate need only be smaller than the effective density of the teeter bed to achieve a separation. The
separation can be achieved even if the buoyancy of the bubble-particle aggregate is too small to lift the
particle load in an open pool of liquid [14]. This means the diameter or number of air bubbles required
to float a given particle can be greatly decreased. In some cases, the aeration rate may be only 10% of
that employed by mechanical cells or columns. This also indicates that lower contact angle and lower
collector consumption are required. In the full-scale tests, the fatty acid and fuel oil blend (FA/FO) was
reduced between 10-38% [13].

The HydroFloat cell separation needs effective desliming of the feed in order to remove fines
that would otherwise be carried nonselectively into the clean product. For fine or ultra-fine particle
separation, flotation columns provide better performance than the HydroFloat cells.
 FINE AND ULTRA-FINE PARTICLE COLUMN FLOTATION

Ultra-Fine Phosphate Column Flotation

Column flotation has been applied to a wide variety of phosphate ore types ranging from
volcanic to sedimentary. Although benefits are seen across the entire particle size range, column cells
are particularly well suited to the production of fine and ultra-fine concentrates. One representative
application of the CPT flotation column to fine and ultra-fine flotation is the Barreiro carbonatite
complex located in Araxá, MG. The major components of the rock formation are carbonatitic and
glimmeritic rocks. The major source of phosphate is derived from apatite, which comprises
approximately 30% of the minerals in the ore zones. The major impurities consist of iron oxides and
silicate minerals. A simplified phosphate processing flowsheet [5] is shown in Figure 4. The ore is
crushed, screened, and then fed to the concentrator, where it is subjected to grinding (rod and ball
mills), classification in hydrocyclones, low intensity magnetic separation, desliming in hydrocyclones,
flotation and dewatering etc.

Figure 4 - Typical phosphate processing flowsheet

Traditionally, the desliming stage is designed to remove particles finer than about 25-30 μm.
The high surface area and high impurity content associated with this particle size class make it difficult
to treat by conventional flotation equipment. The removal of these slimes represents a major source of
phosphate loss, which could represent as much as 10% -15% of the total reserves. The application of
column flotation makes it possible to extend the size range of particles that can be treated by flotation
to about 5-10 μm. Figure 5 shows a typical circuit arrangement for ultra-fine phosphate separation [5].
By re-processing the primary slimes (-30 μm) in second stage of hydrocyclones cutting at 5-10 μm, the
cyclone underflow is fed to a series of conditioners where the pulp is treated with caustic soda, starch
and a collector prior to introduction to the flotation columns. The flotation columns are arranged in a
conventional rougher-scavenger-cleaner configuration with intermediate products recycled internally.
 Figure 5 - Typical circuit arrangement for ultra-fine phosphate separation

Table 1 shows a typical Brazilian phosphate mass balance for an ultra-fines flotation circuit.
Assuming that the chemical analysis of the slimes is essentially the same as the feed grade, the loss of
phosphate in the slimes is equal to the mass rejection. It can be seen from Table 1 that the P2O5 grade
of ultra-fine phosphate can be increased from 8.1% up to 33.5%. The flotation tailing P2O5 grade is
only 2.7%. By treatment in flotation columns, it is possible to obtain an ultra-fine concentrate ideally
suited for the production of Single Super Phosphate (SSP) fertilizers. The fine particle size minimizes
the costs of concentrate regrinding at the fertilizer plant saving additional processing costs.

Table 1 - Typical phosphate mass balance for ultra-fines circuit

Stream Mass P2O5
(%) (%)
Primary Slimes 100.0 6.0
Slimes Reject 60.0 4.6
Ultrafine Flotation Feed 40.0 8.1
Cleaner Concentrate 7.0 33.5
Flotation Tailings 33.0 2.7

Faced with difficult ores, and low-grade deposits, the Brazilian phosphate producers have
been world leaders in adapting this technology to enhance fine phosphate recovery. Most of the major
producers are operating an ultra-fines recovery circuit in their concentrators.

Fine Iron Ore Column Flotation

The integration of column flotation into existing iron ore plants can be done in a number of
different ways depending on metallurgical and economic objectives. Some of the common objectives
are:
• Incorporate column flotation into an existing plant to permit the production of low silica pellets.
• Increase the flotation capacity of an existing plant.
• Improve the overall plant iron recovery by re-treatment of the tailings.
• Install a circuit capable of producing more than one product grade.

Many plants require the flexibility to produce more than one product grade (eg blast furnace
(2.2% SiO2) and direct reduction (0.8% SiO2)) using the same equipment. Usually when the higher
silica blast furnace products are produced, the grinding requirements for liberation decrease and
therefore the plants can operate at increased throughputs. The higher feed rate will affect the feed size
distribution and must be taken into account in the circuit design. The following examples show some of
the flowsheet configurations which have been adopted by iron ore producers.
Example I-Cleaner-Scavenger Circuit

For this Brazilian flotation plant, the original circuit consisted of four parallel mechanical
flotation lines containing a rougher, cleaner, and two scavenging stages. The depletion of reserves at
the existing mine and the subsequent development of a new ore zone necessitated the modification of
the existing flowsheet [11] since ore from the new mine is more difficult to grind and requires longer
flotation time. A number of circuit alternatives were considered:
• Installation of an additional line of conventional cells.
• Increasing flotation capacity by installing a line of column cells.
• Adding column cells to existing flotation lines to act as recleaners.

Pilot plant testing results revealed that the third option provided the best combination of plant
throughput and iron recovery. The flowsheet for the modified circuit [15] is shown in Figure 6.

Figure 6 - Columns added to an existing circuit

One column has been added as a recleaner to each processing line to preserve circuit
flexibility. The recleaner column feed grade ranges between 1% and 6% silica, therefore, one column
stage is sufficient to produce either blast-furnace or direct-reduction concentrate. A scavenger column
has been added to the flowsheet to maximize fine iron recovery particularly during the periods where
direct reducing grade is being produced. Because these columns have been added to an existing silica
flotation plant as recleaners, consideration needs be given to the effects of variations in the roughing
and primary cleaning circuit. Generally the fine, fast floating silica is removed in the roughing stage
and therefore the column feed tends to be enriched in coarse silica. Furthermore, any operational
problems with the existing plant tend to flow through to the column circuit resulting in variable feed
conditions.

The flotation rate constant for the silica particles is affected by feed grade and particle size.
Many iron ore concentrators use the quantity of +150 μm material in the flotation feed as a measure of
the performance of the grinding circuit. This particle size is well within the normal size range for
flotation and presents no particular problems. Particles larger than 300 μm however become
increasingly difficult to float and to retain in the froth phase.

For plants using hydrocyclones for classification, the distribution of silica is not even
throughout the particle size range. The silica often tends to concentrate in the coarser size fractions. As
the amount of +150 μm in the feed increases the quantity of +300 μm tends to increase exponentially
thus compounding the problem. Particles in the +300 μm size range produce relatively poor response
with the maximum recoveries often below 50%. In a column the slurry falls by gravity through the
collection zone. Consequently the coarser particles settle at a rate higher than the average slurry. For
example, if the mean slurry residence time is 12 minutes, the residence time of the +300 μm particles
could be 6 - 8 minutes depending on the slurry rheology within the collection zone. Therefore, when
considering columns for this type of application it is important to have a good understanding of the
degree of variation of particle sizes in the existing circuit to permit proper sizing of the column circuit.

Example II-Silica Reduction from Magnetite Concentrate

CPT Inc. has recently completed the basic engineering for a 1180 TPH flotation plant
designed to lower the silica content of a magnetite concentrate from 7% - 9% SiO2 to 2.2% SiO2. The
basic flowsheet [15] is shown in Figure 7. New feed is ground to 80% passing 150 μm and is fed to
primary magnetic separators. The magnetic concentrate is reground to approximately 75% -45 μm and
is retreated in secondary magnetic separators which produce a concentrate containing between 7% - 9%
SiO2. The magnetic concentrate is conditioned first with caustic starch solution and then with amine
prior to being fed to a single stage flotation column where the silica content is reduced to below 2.2%
SiO2.

Figure 7 - Column flotation circuit for magnetite treatment

The ore is highly variable in magnetite content and therefore it was necessary to design the
circuit to tolerate large fluctuations in feed rates. A high level of instrumentation has been specified to
provide on-stream analysis, automatic reagent metering and the ability to switch groups of columns
into “hot stand-by” mode. During periods of decreasing feed rates, individual columns will be by-
passed, the reagent addition stopped and the columns placed in recycle mode. When the feed increases
to normal levels, the process is reversed and the columns resume normal operation.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

Eriez HydroFloat cell has been developed to overcome some of the shortcomings associated
with traditional flotation machines in recovering coarse particles. This novel separator is based on the
density difference between the hydrophilic particles and particle-bubble aggregates after bubble
attachment to the hydrophobic particles. Compared to traditional flotation equipment for treating coarse
particles, the HydroFloat cell has the advantages of enhanced separation recovery, higher throughput
capacity, reduced reagents and air consumption. Test data obtained from the full-scale HydroFloat
separator tests indicate that the HydroFloat separator provided BPL recoveries approaching and
exceeding 90% while the existing cells struggled to achieve 80% BPL recovery. The performance of
single HydroFloat cell is close to the performance of the combined rougher-scavenger pneumatic cells.
The feed rate to an existing HydroFloat separator can be as high as 20 t/h/m2 and treats 56% more
material than the previously installed pneumatic cells.
 CPT flotation columns have been successfully applied to separation of ultra-fine particles (30-
5 μm) that are difficult to treat by conventional flotation equipment. When the P2O5 grade of the
column flotation feed is 8.1%, the concentrate P2O5 grade of 33.5% and tailing grade of 2.7% can be
achieved.

Many iron-ore producers world-wide are considering columns as a viable alternative to

conventional flotation machines for the reduction of silica in fine pellet feed. The abilities to operate
with wash water and deep froth beds result in improved iron recoveries particularly when producing
direct reduction grade concentrate. The circuit chosen is dependent on the range of flows the column is
required to handle and the metallurgical performance expected. Depending on the metallurgical
objectives and the degree of upgrading required, columns circuits may be configured as a rougher and
cleaner or as a cleaner and scavenger.

The Eriez, CPT combination now allows customers to successfully recover both fine and
coarse fractions previously thought to be challenging to recover.

REFERENCES

1. A. Gaudin, J. Grob and H. Henderson, “Effect of Particle Size in Flotation”, Technical

Publication No. 414, AIME, New York, NY, USA, 1931.

2. T.M. Morris, “Measurement and Evaluation of the Rate of Flotation as a Function of Particle Size”,
Mining Engineering, Vol. 4, No. 8, 1952, 794-798.

3. J.N. Kohmuench, M.J. Mankosa, G.H. Luttrell and G.T. Adel, “A Process Engineering Evaluation of
the CrossFlow Separator”, Minerals and Metallurgical Processing, Vol. 19, No. 1, 2002, 43-49.

4. M.J. Mankosa, J.N. Kohmuench , G.H. Luttrell, G. Gruber and J. Shoniker, “In-Plant Testing of the
HydroFloat Separator for Coarse Phosphate Recovery”, Final Report, Florida Institute of
Phosphate Research, Publication No. 02-137-188, Florida, FL, USA, 2002, 41.

5. H.E. Wyslouzil, “The Use of Column Flotation for the Recovery of Ultra-Fine Phosphates”, 2009,
http://en-ca.eriez.com/Products/Markets/mineralflotation.

6. T. Cienski and V. Coffin, “Column Flotation Operation at Mines Gaspe Molybdenum Circuit”, 13th
Annual CMP Conference, Ottawa, Canada, 1981.

7. R. Coleman and I. Kilgour, “The Installation of a Final Cleaning Column at Ok Tedi”, Fourth Mill
Operators’ Conference, Burnie, Tasmania, 1991, 10-14.

8. E.P. Smithson, C.I.A. John, T.H. Rea and W.M. Mwenya, “Improving Concentrate Quality in the
Concentrators of Zambia Consolidated Copper Mines Limited Using Column Cells”, Column 91,
Int. Conf. on Column Flotation, Sudbury, Canada, 1991.
 9. P.R.M. Viana, J.P. Silva, P.J.B. Rabelo, A.G. Coelho and V.C. Silva, “Column Flotation for the
Expansion of the Flotation Circuit at Samarco Mineraca, Brazil”, Column 91, Int. Conf. on
Column Flotation, Sudbury, Canada, 1991.

10. D.J. Murdock, R.J. Tucker and H.P. Jacobi, “Column Cells VS. Conventional Flotation, A Cost
Comparison”, Column 91, Int. Conf. on Column Flotation, Sudbury, Canada, 1991.

11. K.L. Sandvik, A.S. Nybo and O. Rushfeldt, “Reverse Flotation to Low Impurity Levels by Column
Flotation”, Column 91, Int. Conf. on Column Flotation, Sudbury, Canada, 1991.

12. Levenspiel, O., “Chemical Reaction Engineering”, Chap. 9, Wiley, N.Y., 1972.

13. J.N. Kohmuench, M.J. Mankosa, D.G. Kennedy, J.L. Yasalonis, G.B. Taylor and G.H. Luttrell,
“Implementation of the HydroFloat Technology at the South Fort Meade Mine”, SME Annual
Meeting & Exhibit, Denver, Colorado, USA, 2007.

14. M.J. Mankosa, J.N. Kohmuench, G.H. Luttrell and M. Eisenmann, “In-Plant Testing of the HydroFloat
Separator for Coarse Coal Recovery”, Proceedings, 17th International Coal Preparation Conference,
Lexington, Kentucky, USA, 2000, 333-340.

15. H.E. Wyslouzil, “The Production of High Grade Iron Ore Concentrates Using Flotation Columns”,
2009, http://en-ca.eriez.com/Products/Markets/mineralflotation

View publication stats